[ispcp] Re: [council] possible motion - would need to request 10 day waiver.

[Tony Holmes]

We need to discuss this in tomorrow's meeting
Tony

Sent from my iPad

> On 19 Oct 2015, at 13:55, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> wrote:
> 
> After reading Avri's proposal with more diligence and discussing it with Anne from IPC, I understand it being intended to avoid any GNSO (council) resolutions on the matter. That to my knowledge means the GNSO as a whole, not single SGs or Cs.
>  
> In addition, I understand now that the motion makes sense only if the last para stays (maybe in a modified version):
>  
> “...
> to working through the process as agreed upon in the charter before
> making any resolutions declaring support or opposition to possible outcomes.
> ...”
>  
> The IPC’s concern is related to the duration of the process and they’re looking to impose a deadline like “...as long as the CCWG meetings in Dublin continue.”
>  
> Further discussion is needed
>  
> Best regards
>  
> Wolf-Ulrich
>  
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> From: Avri Doria
> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 1:08 AM
> To: <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: [council] possible motion - would need to request 10 day waiver.
>  
>  
> To my fellow council members,
>  
> I would like to offer one last motion before I end my tenure on the GNSO
> council.
>  
> I know I have missed the motion deadline and therefore request
> consideration for waiver of the 10 day rule for motions, noting that
> this request is submitted at least 24 hours before the meeting scheduled
> for 21 October 2015.
>  
> I also note that I am available to consider any friendly amendments that
> might be required for acceptance of the resolution that might come based
> on Stakeholder Group and Constituency consideration of this motion.
>  
> --- Motion
>  
> Whereas
>  
> On 13 November 2014 the GNSO approved the charter for a Cross Community
> Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountabilty);
>  
> On  3 August the Public Comment on the CCWG-Accountability 2nd
> Draft Proposal was initiated, which ended on 12 Septemebr 2015;
>  
> The CCWG-Accountabilty has analyzed the comments received in the
> review of the 2nd draft and is working toward updating its reference
> implementation taking into account the concerns expressed in those comments;
>  
> and The CCWG-Accountabilty  is working in a considered and collegial
> manner to achieve a consensus solution to ICANN Accountability;
>  
> Acknowledging
>  
> the superb and continuing leadership of CCWG-Accountabilty by the team
> which includes the GNSO appointed co-chair Thomas Rickert, to whom we
> are grateful for his time and consistent effort;
>  
>  
> Resolved
>  
> The GNSO reiterates its support for the process that is ongoing in
> CCWG-Accountability,
>  
> its commitment to participating in continuing discussions with the goal
> of finding solution with broad agreement for ICANN accountabity in
> preparations for IANA transition, and
>  
> to working through the process as agreed upon in the charter before
> making any resolutions declaring support or opposition to possible outcomes.
>  
> ---
>  
> thanks,
>  
> avri
>  
>  
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ispcp/attachments/20151019/fcdcc0b9/attachment.html>